We would also appreciate your feedback on Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia. Please write feedback hereHere you can read media articles about the Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia which have been published all over the world.

They are not opposing notions but are relative.A pot, for instance, is a particular (rang mtshan) in relation to its property of being impermanent (anitya, mi rtagpa), but at the same time it is a universal as well in relation to its individuations, since the property of being a pot is common to all kinds of pots such as golden pots, silver pots, copper pots, and the like.[11]

"Such definitions of rang mtshan on which others insist as that which exists,without sharing (ma 'drespar) place, time and essentialnature (yul dus rang bzhin) [with other things] and that which is causally efficacious are unacceptable."

For the dGe lugs pa thinkers, however, 'golden pot' is an example of a particular (rang mtshan), and 'pot' is a universal (spyi). In Tibetan, this example is always simply given as 'gser bum＼ i.e.,'golden pot', which is not accompanied by a demonstrative pronoun, nor by an indefinite article,nor by a suffix designating the plural.

the expression 'gserbum signifieseither a golden pot or the golden pot in the sense of a generic singular (viz.,a golden pot or the golden pot in general), which is to be cognized as such by its properties of being a pot and being gold.

These properties are, on one hand, essentialcharacteristics of a golden pot, whereby a golden pot is distinguished from other things such as silver pots, copper pots, glasses,tables, and so on. On the other hand, they are also common properties to all golden pots, viz.,18-carat golden pots, gold-plated golden pots, small golden pots, big golden pots, and so on.

That is to say, any individuation or differentiation among individual golden pots is not, and cannot be, indicated by the expression 'gser bum＼

This revision is, however, certainly an outcome of various external and internal factors. Such a realistic position as the dGe lugs pa thinkers have is actually considered to have originated with some Indianscholars and have been carried over by Tibetan gSang phu tradition.[22]

Of course one should also clarify,in addition to this historical background, the theoreticalgrounds for the dGe lugs pas' redefinition of svalakṣaṇa. We will devote the last section of the present paper to this inquiry.

Hence, whatever is asserted by the substantialists as the very concept of rang mtshan is [none other than] that which the dBu ma thai 'gyur ba asserts to be unestablished as a [real] basis (gzhi ma grub) even according to verbal conventions (tha snyad duyang), for such [things] as that which (exists) not sharing (ma 'drespa) place, time and essentialnature [with other things], and that which is causally, efficacious are, on the contrary, accepted by the dBu ma thai 'gyur ba too [according to verbal conventions].

Therefore, these [things] are the instances of that which is to be defined [as rang mtshan} (mtshan gzhi) but are not the definiens of rang mtshan here in the case (skabs 'dir) [in which the Sautrantikatenet is treated]."[23]

In other words, the dGe lugs pas intended to connect the different systems, which had developed separately in different periods in India, by reinterpreting them systematically from one common perspective.

↑This paper was presented at the University of Lausanne on the 26th of March, 2002, and originally written on the basis of my previous two Japanese articles, i.e.,
"Gelukuha ni yoru Kyōryōbu Gakusetsu Rikai (1)" and "(2)" as well as a German paper, "Das Individuelle und das Wirkliche bei den dGe lugs pa: Grundbegriffe buddhistischer Philosophic in tibetischer Modifizierung", read at the University of Munich on the 22nd of November 2001.
For this revised version, I would like to thank Prof. Tom Tillemans for his valuable suggestions regarding both contents and English expressions.

↑It is interesting to note that both rGyal tshab and mKhas grub offer a similarelucidation in their respective commentaries on Pramāṇavārttika I 40, as I have pointed out in Yoshimizu,
"Pramāṇavārttika I 40 no kaishaku ni tsuite",p.(101) n.10 and "Geluku-ha ni yoru Kyōryōbu gakusetsu rikai (2)", p. 22f